Man Given Crack Cocaine To Register Voters Arrested In Ohio

[zod]

another black eye for the NAACP............. :nono:


Mon Oct 18 2004 13:26:03 ET

October 18, 2004

The Defiance County Sheriff's Office arrested Chad Staton, age 22, of Stratton Ave., Defiance, on a charge of False Registration, in Violation of Section 3599.11 of the Ohio Revised Code, a felony of the fifth degree.

The SheriffÕs Office alleges that Staton filled out over 100 voter registration forms that were fictitious. Staton was to be paid for each registration form that he could get citizens to fill out. However, Staton himself filled out the registrations and returned them to the woman who hired him from Toledo, Ohio. Deputies allege that Staton was paid crack cocaine for the falsified registrations.

Defiance Deputies along with Toledo Police Department detectives conducted a search warrant of a residence on Woodland in Toledo, believed to be the home of the woman who hired Staton to solicit voter registration. Officers confiscated drug paraphernalia along with voter registration forms from the home. The occupant of the home, Georgianne Pitts, age 41, advised law enforcement, along with Ohio B.C.I.&I., that she had been recruited by Thaddeus J. Jackson, II, of Cleveland, to obtain voter registrations. Pitts admitted to paying Staton crack cocaine for the registrations in lieu of money.

A business card provided by Pitts indicated that Jackson is the Assistant NVF Ohio Director of the NAACP National Voter Fund.

The initial complaint received by the Sheriff's Office came from the Defiance County Board of Elections. The Board had received the 100 plus registration forms from the Cuyahoga Board of Elections that had been submitted to the Cuyahoga Board by the NAACP National Voter Fund.

Developing...

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash3.htm

[Damn True]

Sweet!
LOL.

Last week I had to go take care of a ticket and there was a table out front of the courthouse with a sign on it reading:

"Off parole, on probation? You CAN register to vote."

(parole/probation may have been the other way around)

At the bottom of the sign was the text:
"This public service paid for by the Democratic National Comittee"

Sweet, convicted criminals are EXACTLY the people I want taking part in selecting local and national govt. leadership.

[Jr_Bullit]

Doesn't matter what you "feel" true - if they've served their time and paid for what they did wrong they get to be active members of society again. You should read your sig a little more closely.

[Silver]

Sweet!
LOL.

Last week I had to go take care of a ticket and there was a table out front of the courthouse with a sign on it reading:

"Off parole, on probation? You CAN register to vote."

(parole/probation may have been the other way around)

At the bottom of the sign was the text:
"This public service paid for by the Democratic National Comittee"

Sweet, convicted criminals are EXACTLY the people I want taking part in selecting local and national govt. leadership.

Once again, why shouldn't people who have served thier time be allowed to vote?

[Damn True]

I just find it amusing that the DNC is courting that demographic.

If that dosen't bother you.....it should.

It isn't out of the kindness of their heart I assure you. Its because people like that are more likely to be on public assistance of some sort. Since DNC candidates more often than not support more welfare, and more entitlements they can extrapolate that such a person is more likely to vote for a democrat.

Sweet, what a pair.

[zod]

I think that Felons who have paid their time in full (ie. not on parol) should be allowed to vote.

[Silver]

I just find it amusing that the DNC is courting that demographic.

If that dosen't bother you.....it should.

Why? Like I said, if a felon has served his/her sentence, I have no problem with them voting.

Hijinks from both sides, with the RNC trying to make it seem like if you have a traffic ticket outstanding you can't vote...

[narlus]

when the last election came down to 537 votes, you enlist who you can.

[Damn True]

What? Were you the crack guy in Ohio?

How did you connect the RNC to this at all?

[zod]

and re-enlist, and give them crack..........

[Damn True]

when the last election came down to 537 votes, you enlist who you can.


That's the winning spirit!
You from Chicago?

Vote early, vote often, vote democrat!

[Silver]

What? Were you the crack guy in Ohio?

How did you connect the RNC to this at all?

Where do you think the meme that felons can't vote (when it is on a state by state basis) comes from?

Yes, I'm the crack guy, you've got me. On the weekends, I also push old ladies off of bridges just for kicks.

[zod]

I also push old ladies off of bridges just for kicks.


Bwahahahahahaha!!! Good times! :evil:

[Jr_Bullit]

I just find it amusing that the DNC is courting that demographic.

If that dosen't bother you.....it should.

It isn't out of the kindness of their heart I assure you. Its because people like that are more likely to be on public assistance of some sort. Since DNC candidates more often than not support more welfare, and more entitlements they can extrapolate that such a person is more likely to vote for a democrat.

Sweet, what a pair.

Hrmmm just like it should bother the Repubs who sit outside the courthouse to help immigrants take full advantage of the new rights by registering them to vote - but the forms the new citizens were given were already filled out for republicans?

If you participate in society by holding a job, living, taking advantage of its social perks, or being affected by its negative policies, then you should have a right to vote for the side that makes the most sense to you - and those who have served their time fall into the cateogory of participating in society - like it or not you probably rub elbows with ex-cons on a regular basis who would like to see their votes count.

Do you honestly believe that your contribution to society is so much greater than that of an ex-con that you should have the right to deny them participation in society?

[Skookum]

Hrmmm just like it should bother the Repubs who sit outside the courthouse to help immigrants take full advantage of the new rights by registering them to vote - but the forms the new citizens were given were already filled out for republicans?

If you participate in society by holding a job, living, taking advantage of its social perks, or being affected by its negative policies, then you should have a right to vote for the side that makes the most sense to you - and those who have served their time fall into the cateogory of participating in society - like it or not you probably rub elbows with ex-cons on a regular basis who would like to see their votes count.

Do you honestly believe that your contribution to society is so much greater than that of an ex-con that you should have the right to deny them participation in society?
I like your brain. :D

Reformed ex-felons who are responsible would vote thier conscience, one's who are not, are too busy being losers to vote anyways. Alot of people in this world have commited crimes and never will be held accountable, Bush was rich and did Cocaine put that combo together and there's a felony in there somewhere......

[zod]

Can we get back to the point at hand.......the NAACP is corrupt as hell (not like that's a news flash) :)

[Skookum]

Can we get back to the point at hand.......the NAACP is corrupt as hell (not like that's a news flash) :)
Yah but what if you allowed NASCAR into the mix, everything would get better i suppose? :rolleyes:

[Damn True]

Hrmmm just like it should bother the Repubs who sit outside the courthouse to help immigrants take full advantage of the new rights by registering them to vote - but the forms the new citizens were given were already filled out for republicans?

If you participate in society by holding a job, living, taking advantage of its social perks, or being affected by its negative policies, then you should have a right to vote for the side that makes the most sense to you - and those who have served their time fall into the cateogory of participating in society - like it or not you probably rub elbows with ex-cons on a regular basis who would like to see their votes count.

Do you honestly believe that your contribution to society is so much greater than that of an ex-con that you should have the right to deny them participation in society?\

Ahh what the heck, let 'em purchase firearms too!

[Jr_Bullit]

\

Ahh what the heck, let 'em purchase firearms too!

Ahh - there's the generous spirit - besides, if they wanted to commit their crimes again, I'm sure there was plenty of information on creative ways to skirt the law they could have gleaned while "on the inside". So what? They're still members of society after having served time, and contribute no less then a person who spends their life on welfare using the number of kids they produce as a reason to get more money from the government. More often then not they are more willing to hold the kind of job most "citizens" wouldn't touch, because they need to work and survive in order to stay "free".

If you are a member of a democratic society, you deserve to have a say in the type of government your nation has.

I'm quite frankly, disappointed in the creativeness of your reply.

[Damn True]

Here's the thing. If someone is a convict they have proven that they are NOT capable of responibly dealing with their own lives and property or that of others. Having completed a sentance does not prove that they now can any more than the fact that you paid your last speeding ticket proves you will not speed again.

People that cannot responsibly deal with their own life should not be involved in the political process.

[quadricolour]

People that cannot responsibly deal with their own life should not be involved in the political process.

Maybe they could add a clause which would allow them to vote, so long as they voted Republican? :rolleyes:

Would that work for you?

[Damn True]

No. This has nothing to do with parties.

The primary reason for my opposition to it is that irresponsible people should not be involved in the political process.

Second, a convict is far more likely to be on public assistance. Therefore they are far more likely to vote for the party that is putting food in their mouth which equates to a party being given a greater opportunity to "buy votes" by promising increases in public assistance.

[Jr_Bullit]

True - perhaps you should be more careful about passing judgement on others. Until you are voted into a position where your judgement surpasses all others, we all could be judging you the same. You can use the societal leach argument on someone who finds away to live on government assisted unemployment pay for more than a year.

You can use the societal leach argument on someone who finds away to claim many children as dependents in order to raise the amount of welfare they receive daily.

And always beware of who else may feel you are unable to "responsibly deal with your life".

Read your sig a little more closely....

[Damn True]

Quit throwing my sig in my face, the context of that verse bears no relation to this at all.

People that are on unemployment paid unemployment INSURANCE while they were working and are entitled to it.

There are people that are on welfare who ARE societal leaches. Do you think they would vote for someone who would REDUCE welfare? .....and no, I don't think they should vote.

I like you Jen. You are bright, articulate and often witty. However.....your level of idealism surprises me. I figured that you would have a greater appreciation for EARNing ones privlidges in society.

[Tenchiro]

another black eye for the NAACP............. :nono:

Pun intended? :devil: :monkey:

[Silver]

the context of that verse bears no relation to this at all.


If I had a dollar for every time that happened to me... :p

[ohio]

No. This has nothing to do with parties.

The primary reason for my opposition to it is that irresponsible people should not be involved in the political process.

Second, a convict is far more likely to be on public assistance. Therefore they are far more likely to vote for the party that is putting food in their mouth which equates to a party being given a greater opportunity to "buy votes" by promising increases in public assistance.

So just because you haven't been convicted of a felony, you're automatically a responsible person?

I would trust someone who spent 5 years behind bars for being a stupid youth to have their priorities straighter than someone who, say, wasn't convicted because they're wealthy family hired better lawyers, and they've never been held accountable for anything during their long pampered but conviction free lifetime.

[zod]

Pun intended? :devil: :monkey:


When I typed it, it did cross my mind :evil: but no pun intended

[Tenchiro]

The primary reason for my opposition to it is that irresponsible people should not be involved in the political process.

I don't think the current president would be very happen with a policy like this... ;) The vice-president either...

[ohio]

There are people that are on welfare who ARE societal leaches. Do you think they would vote for someone who would REDUCE welfare? .....and no, I don't think they should vote.

No but they sure as hell would vote for better funding of urban schools, because they don't want their children to be stuck in the same lifestyle they are. That you would deny someone who has never commited a crime other than, at worst, sloth, is appalling.

Who are you to judge?

[Jr_Bullit]

Perhaps we should focus more than on the kiddos to fill them with proper moral values, rather than trying to prevent legal adults from participating in a society that continues to pass judgement on them far beyond the time they legally must server for their crimes.

Perhaps we should consider reforming the welfare and unemployment systems so the money flow is cut off if you refuse to participate in society, rather than simply denying them a voice at all in their government.

Perhaps through simple education we can begin to stem this tide of bitterness and pity that causes those of us who do work hard to be angry towards those who take advantage, yet can't stop paying their bills because they can't care for themselves.

Or...better yet...perhaps we should simply eliminate all forms of government controls and let anarchy reign for awhile until the leaches are purged, and only the strong, creative, smart individuals remain.

[Damn True]

Perhaps we should focus more than on the kiddos to fill them with proper moral values, rather than trying to prevent legal adults from participating in a society that continues to pass judgement on them far beyond the time they legally must server for their crimes.

Clearly, but I fail to understand your attachment to giving ex-cons the keys to the city once their sentance is served. One word recitivism.

Perhaps we should consider reforming the welfare and unemployment systems so the money flow is cut off if you refuse to participate in society, rather than simply denying them a voice at all in their government.
Not a bad idea. There ought to be more pathways to a retraction of assistance, but I like that one a lot.

Perhaps through simple education we can begin to stem this tide of bitterness and pity that causes those of us who do work hard to be angry towards those who take advantage, yet can't stop paying their bills because they can't care for themselves.
They can't/wont take care of themselves because they exist in a culture that tells them they don't have to. When generations live on handouts you can't tell me that I am the reason for it because it pisses me off to have to support someone who can, but refuses to support himself.

Or...better yet...perhaps we should simply eliminate all forms of government controls and let anarchy reign for awhile until the leaches are purged, and only the strong, creative, smart individuals remain.

Not a bad idea.
But as a evolutionist, consider this:
Those who are most adapted to, and most able to handle living in the world we as the human race have created are on average having 1-2 children. That equates to a zero if not negative population growth curve. However, those who are ill adapted to handle this world are having many many more children. So it seems that eventually the number of people available to provide support will shrink while the number requireing it will grow.
Reverse evolution?

[Silver]

Social Darwinism?

Wait a minute...you're confusing the fact that people who subscribe to evolutionary theory are automatically Social Darwinists...which is absolutely not true. I can't speak for Jr. Bullit's beliefs, but that idea is completely and utterly false.

[Pedalist]

So anyway one time in bandcamp.......

[Silver]

Not a bad idea. There ought to be more pathways to a retraction of assistance, but I like that one a lot.


Hate to put you on the spot, but how do you reconcile the teachings of Jesus Christ with a Randian philosophical outlook?

Just curious, y'know? I'm still looking for the part in the bible where Jesus means tests his followers...

[Damn True]

Because I believe in Jesus does not mean I have to think it's ok for the govt to take what I work hard for and give it to someone who refuses to do the same.
Yeah, give unto Ceaser what is Ceasers. I have no problem with that. I'll pay my taxes, but I want it to go to benefit my safety, my security, and things that benefit the greater good. Rewarding sloth does not qualify as such.

[Silver]

Because I believe in Jesus does not mean I have to think it's ok for the govt to take what I work hard for and give it to someone who refuses to do the same.
Yeah, give unto Ceaser what is Ceasers. I have no problem with that. I'll pay my taxes, but I want it to go to benefit my safety, my security, and things that benefit the greater good. Rewarding sloth does not qualify as such.

I never ever saw Jesus say that in any of his sermons. There is a parable or two that may apply (the talents on comes to mind) but those are mostly focused on spiritual mattesr. Jesus seemed to be very NOT worried about financial matters, by my reading.

I guess maybe you see what you look for? Because Christ appears to be standing right next to Marx economically, the way I read him. Rich men have trouble getting in heaven, remember, because they can't forsake their earthly possessions. If you have two coats, you supposed to give one to a brother who doesn't have one. There's nothing in there about making sure that said brother works his ass off...

[Damn True]

"I never ever saw Jesus say that in any of his sermons."
You were there? Cool, what was he like? :p


At the period of our Saviour’s residence on earth, the Jews were greatly divided in opinion, respecting the lawfulness of paying tribute to the Roman emperors, under whose government they lived.

"Render unto Cesar the things that are Caesar; and to God, the things that are God’s" (Mark 12:17).

We’ve heard it all before. Jesus was a liberal because he fed the hungry and healed the sick. Implicit is the common notion that conservatives don’t want people to be fed or healed. Liberals think they’ve cornered the market on compassion simply because they advocate bigger government programs to do the caring and feeding. To sum up the difference between liberal compassion and true compassion, I’ll borrow an old saying: “Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.”

Non-political conservative values, such as promoting traditional families, self-restraint, self-reliance (physical, not spiritual), to name a few, are biblical attributes. Feeding the hungry and comforting the sick are also biblical attributes, but Jesus Christ did much more than this in his 3-year ministry. That is not all he did or ultimately why he came.

Christ wasn’t a traveling doctor or soup kitchen volunteer walking the countryside curing ailments and filling bellies with loaves of bread and fish. He was extending an offer to heal spiritual sickness and provide the bread of life — Himself — to satisfy spiritual hunger. The physical feeding and curing were signs pointing to the real feeding and curing.

[ohio]

Did Jesus also teach that it's okay to be so blinded by a condescending need to teach a suffering man a lesson that one loses ability to sympathize (the root, by the way, of "compassion," and not to be confused with "empathy") with someone who has not lived the same life as himself.

[Damn True]

Compassion and empathy are one thing, enabling is something all together different.

There are people that fall on hard times and need assistance. No problem with that. The problem is when we allow people to make a career, even a culture of it.

[ohio]

The problem is when we allow people to make a career, even a culture of it.

Propose a solution to this problem that you approve of and doesn't leave people to starve, and I'll retract my calls of hypocrisy.

[Damn True]

The easiest one I can think of is to trade welfare checks for public service.

There are lots of things that need doing that state an local governments have to put off because they can't afford to pay people to do them. Folks on welfare could accomplish many of those tasks AND perhaps gain a marketable skill that could be translated into an actual job. How many schools in your area could use a fresh coat of paint?

I'm not up on how exactly he did it, but Tommy Thompson reformed welfare in Wisconson to the degree that the number of people on welfare droped by like 80%. There are ways....I just think that in a lot of cases govt's aren't using them because people on welfare represent a voting segment that is beholden to them.

[Damn True]

The “Wisconsin Works” program, known as “W-2”] replaced AFDC. It is an employment program rather than a welfare program. It requires those “who can work to get a job and those who cannot to contribute according to their abilities.” The old system showered recipients with all the welfare benefits possible, thus encouraging dependency. Wisconsin Works uses resourceful financial and employment planners who will help program participants. Planners can provide emergency loans for employment-related needs. W-2 provides participants with child care, health care, transportation and training. February 2000 figures show the W-2 caseload is under 6,700 families. That’s a reduction of 80% since W-2 started.

"The welfare system is a perfect example of what I refer to as government sense. When you pay people not to work, not to get married, and to have children out of wedlock, guess what happens? People do not work, they do not get married, and they have more children out of wedlock.
Handing out a welfare check and expecting nothing in return is not public assistance, it is public apathy - “Here is your check, see you next month.” So while Washington stood around and talked about how welfare needed to be changed, we in the states-I started in 1986-started doing something about it. We started offering hope and opportunity along with the welfare check and expecting certain responsibilities in return. We put common sense reforms in place. We required young men and women up to age 19 to go to school; and in the case of chronic truants, we took away that portion of the welfare check attributable to that young man or woman. Some opponents said, “What if they don’t want to go to school?” And I said, “Tough.”

"Now I am undertaking the most radical program I have ever done in welfare-we are eliminating it. We did away with the welfare department and turned it into a jobs department. Everyone has to do something in order to receive a check.
In order to accomplish these things we had to go to Washington and kiss someone’s ring to say, “Please give us a chance to try something that might work.” I have had waivers under Reagan, Bush and Clinton. Why should states need waivers to try innovative ideas in welfare? Why should we have to go to Washington and kiss somebody’s ring to do what everybody wants us to do and that is to change welfare in our society and give people jobs and hope and optimism

That is why I am fighting for the government to block grant welfare funding back to the States"


~Tommy Thompson

[ohio]

If only it were that easy. You're talking about a program that I (and IMO, common sense) support. Unfortunately, employing a trained laborer costs roughly twice what they're paid in wage. Employing AND training laborer costs even more. I'm all for it, but most (fiscal) conservatives are not. Can you imagine Bush doubling the federal welfare program? Of course not, even though in all likelihood you'd see a drastic drop in need within 5 years.

It's not like people (liberals) have never thought of these ideas. It's almost always that no one (conservatives) will give them the funding to work.

However, I do like your line of thinking, and if, knowing the costs, you're still for this type of program, then I apologize for my harsh comments earlier.

[Damn True]

I'm only 35. If it takes a few years to straighten it out and costs less in the long run then f-it, spend the money now, we'll get it back later.

Liberals are full of ideas, but it takes a Republican to get it done :) I think Thompsons(R) program took less than 5 years to achieve its 80% improvement.

[Silver]

I still call bull****. Jesus never went around and made sure that everyone he gave fish to was a hard worker. He healed beggars, remember? Encouraged charity and giving.

Sounds exactly like what you're calling for, doesn't it?

Y'know, it's bad news when an atheist has to call you out on acting a little more like the principal figure in you religion (you know, the one it happens to be named after?)

[fluff]

I still call bull****. Jesus never went around and made sure that everyone he gave fish to was a hard worker. He healed beggars, remember? Encouraged charity and giving.

Sounds exactly like what you're calling for, doesn't it?

Y'know, it's bad news when an atheist has to call you out on acting a little more like the principal figure in you religion (you know, the one it happens to be named after?)

One of the things I like about atheism is the lack of hypocrisy.

[Damn True]

I still call bull****. Jesus never went around and made sure that everyone he gave fish to was a hard worker. He healed beggars, remember? Encouraged charity and giving.

Sounds exactly like what you're calling for, doesn't it?

Y'know, it's bad news when an atheist has to call you out on acting a little more like the principal figure in you religion (you know, the one it happens to be named after?)


No.
I'm calling for a cessation of the a$$rape we are taking to coddle those who will not work.

READ the stuff I wrote/posted about welfare reform.

Charity and giving to those who truely need it is one thing enabling a culture of leaches is entirely different.

[Damn True]

One of the things I like about atheism is the lack of hypocrisy.


Where is the hypocrisy?

Im saying that we SHOULD help those that need it.

So shall I surmise that you would have the system remain the way it is? Or worse grow?
Easy to say when it isn't YOUR money.

[Silver]

No.
I'm calling for a cessation of the a$$rape we are taking to coddle those who will not work.

READ the stuff I wrote/posted about welfare reform.

Charity and giving to those who truely need it is one thing enabling a culture of leaches is entirely different.

You are now, after someone mentioned it. You weren't earlier.

Show me where Jesus means tests the people he gives fish to.

Equating taxes to being anally raped is in bad taste too, by the way. You're hardly getting raped by taxes.

[Damn True]

You are now, after someone mentioned it. You weren't earlier.

Show me where Jesus means tests the people he gives fish to.

Equating taxes to being anally raped is in bad taste too, by the way. You're hardly getting raped by taxes.

Get off the endictments of my faith, it is starting to pi$$ me off.

Because I didn't type it means I didn't believe it? Don't for a second think that based on what you read here that you have an accurate picture of my thoughts, feelings and beliefs. I haven't offered enough to give it, and there is no way you could figure it out from what I have offered.

I have supported welfare reform like the kind I described for years.

There is no testing going on here. Im saying we shouldn't be giving handouts to those who dont need it.

I'm not? Every cent I earn between January 1st and the end of April goes to state and federal taxes. That is too much.

[Silver]

Get off the endictments of my faith, it is starting to pi$$ me off.

Because I didn't type it means I didn't believe it? Don't for a second think that based on what you read here that you have an accurate picture of my thoughts, feelings and beliefs. I haven't offered enough to give it, and there is no way you could figure it out from what I have offered.

I have supported welfare reform like the kind I described for years.

There is no testing going on here. Im saying we shouldn't be giving handouts to those who dont need it.

I'm not? Every cent I earn between January 1st and the end of April goes to state and federal taxes. That is too much.


Why should I get off of your faith? You're willing to trot it out, and I'm merely pointing out that you're spouting a lot of stuff that I didn't read coming out of Christ's mouth.

And hey, if you're getting assraped by taxes, let me point something out. God appointed George Bush, so in a way (due to the Trinity, if you're into that) that happens to be the cock of Jesus that is impaling you and making work for other people.

Praise the Lord.

[Damn True]

I made no mention of it in this discussion until YOU and Jr-Bullit decided to behave like a$$es and make an issue of it.

I fail to see any point in your arguement other than an opportunity for a childish poke in the eye.

[N8]

Another news bit on the subject...

http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041019/NEWS09/410190343

[Jr_Bullit]

I made issue of your sig - not your faith. I could care less where you got your quote from. You came in passing judgement on those who have served their time based on the judgement passed down upon them by our legal justice system, and denying them the right to participate in their own government by voting. Your sig relates to pride and a haughty spirit leading the way to a fall, and by passing judgement on others whose stories, issues, and reasons for their crimes are completely unknown to you, you act in a prideful and haughty way to my eyes.

You, on the other hand, took it as a slight to your religion. So sorry.

[zod]

STFU and get back to the story at hand.....

And so elections workers immediately began sending out letters, addressed to the people listed at those addresses, as a precaution to ensure that a Mary Poppins, a Jeffrey Dahmer, or a Janet Jackson didn't, in fact, live in Defiance County, she said.

Letters also went out to George Foreman, Brett Favre, Michael Jordan, and Dick Tracy, among others in the bundle to see if the post office would return them as undeliverable.



Mary Poppins..........what a f*ckin' crackhead :thumb:



HUGZ NOT DRUGZ

[Silver]

I made no mention of it in this discussion until YOU and Jr-Bullit decided to behave like a$$es and make an issue of it.

I fail to see any point in your arguement other than an opportunity for a childish poke in the eye.

It's not a poke in the eye to you specifically. Wait, actually it is, but there is another issue at work here.

There is a large segment of the population in this country that trots out Jesus whenever they think he's useful to their point, but they also forget the demands that Jesus puts on them.

It's a lot like getting cut off and getting flashed the finger by someone with a Jesus bumper sticker. If you're not going to take your religion seriously, why should I? (And with an amazing lack of compassion and a spirit of ridicule, I'm going to argue that you're not very Christ like, especially in light of your sig. By the way, have you read the next verse? Let me do the honors: "Better to be lowly in spirit and among the oppressed than to share plunder with the proud." Proverbs 16:19)

By the way, pokes in the eye?

http://www.ridemonkey.com/forums/showthread.php?t=100139

[Damn True]

Well clearly you have found yourself devoid of a valid point so you have degenerated to insult. If thats what you need to do to feel good, go ahead, I can take it. Honestly I won't lose any sleep over it.
I didn't "trot out Jesus" you and jen made really pi$$-poor attempts to attach my disgust with this countries continued entitlement programs that only help to perpetuate themselves to a conflict with my faith.

I submit the following:
Who is more thoughtfull, compassiaonate and caring? The person who is looking to make the investment to help people to become self sufficient, reduce the costs of entitlement programs AND the tax burden on the general populace. Or, the person that wants to perpetuate the cycle of dependance by continueing if not growing entitlement programs?

Because I have a different viewpoint than you, you chose to assume that I did not care or think about the issue or people involved in it and you chose to insult me and what I believe. Very "liberal" of you.

Main Entry: 1lib·er·al
Pronunciation: 'li-b(&-)r&l
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin liberalis suitable for a freeman, generous, from liber free; perhaps akin to Old English lEodan to grow, Greek eleutheros free
BROAD-MINDED; especially : not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or traditional forms

...as for the link....whatever, they are JOKES. I'm sorry, I didn't get the memo that said it was ok for people to make jokes about Republicans/Conservatives, but not Liberals/Democrats. I can laugh at myself, pity you can't do the same.

[N8]

Crack the Vote!

[zod]

No N8.......what's the thing in lit. where you put two seprerate sentances into one??

Smoke the Rock the Vote

[Silver]

you and jen made really pi$$-poor attempts to attach my disgust with this countries continued entitlement programs that only help to perpetuate themselves to a conflict with my faith.



Wrongo...

My problem is you perpetuating the meme that poor people are lazy leeches. It really seems like your disqust is more with the people on the program than with the programs themselves. Pointing out that your attitude conflicts with your religion a bit was just gravy, much like pointing out to the guy with the Greenpeace sticker and the hybrid car that he really shouldn't dump used motor oil into the drain that says "Leads to Ocean."

Who brought up public assistance in the first place in this thread? Wasn't me, and I don't think it was Jr_Bullit. Then you dug yourself in deeper by claiming taxes are akin to an assraping, which was classy. Shortly, I imagine you'll be pulling into Grover Norquist territory and equate taxation with the holocaust.

Because really, after taxes are rape, the only thing you can do to make them seem worse is equate them to a genocide.

[Damn True]

Wrongo...

My problem is you perpetuating the meme that poor people are lazy leeches. It really seems like your disqust is more with the people on the program than with the programs themselves. Pointing out that your attitude conflicts with your religion a bit was just gravy, much like pointing out to the guy with the Greenpeace sticker and the hybrid car that he really shouldn't dump used motor oil into the drain that says "Leads to Ocean."

Who brought up public assistance in the first place in this thread? Wasn't me, and I don't think it was Jr_Bullit. Then you dug yourself in deeper by claiming taxes are akin to an assraping, which was classy. Shortly, I imagine you'll be pulling into Grover Norquist territory and equate taxation with the holocaust.

Because really, after taxes are rape, the only thing you can do to make them seem worse is equate them to a genocide.

Ya know, if you don't understand what I am saying, and either you often dont or you choose to decide what I mean regardless of what I say feel free to ask.
My disgust is with the people who TAKE ADVANTAGE of the system and the system that allows it. I said, no less than three times (which is why I am led to believe you either don't read, understand, or choose to ignore what I am actually saying) that there ARE people who genuinely need public assistance, and I have no problem with them getting it. My problem is with those who can and choose not to take care of themselves.

Poverty is not an incurable disease. If you honestly believe that there aren't people who are in that situation as a result of their own inaction you are either seriously deluded or morbidly overcome with guilt for your own precieved excesses.

Greenpeace - hybrid - oil.......whatever. I don't know anyone tall enough to reach that far.

If you find giving up in excess of 35% of your annual income to taxes acceptible then more power to ya. I hope you got kissed first because you are certainly getting ____ked.
I find those figures, espeicially in light of the way my govt squanders the money on senseless entitlements abhorant and pretty dang close to an a$$rape in terms of fairness.

[DH Diva]

It isn't out of the kindness of their heart I assure you. Its because people like that are more likely to be on public assistance of some sort. Since DNC candidates more often than not support more welfare, and more entitlements they can extrapolate that such a person is more likely to vote for a democrat.


You know, it goes both ways. Locally the college republicans at my university were having people sign fake petions. The petions actually were a contract that pledged your alligence to the republican national party and affiliated you with them. Some took it so far as to use the information to register these people to vote as republicans without their conscent. The people collecting signatures on the fake petions were telling people it was to get measures on the ballot that would enforce stricter punishments for pediphiles and repeat sex offenders. Talk about dirty tactics. Politics get ugly. I would hardly chastise a party for targeting a demographic, both sides do it. What I find disgusting is when you lie to someone and tell them they are helping put child molesters behind bars and they are secretly registering you to vote as a part of a party, without your concent.

[Changleen]

People that cannot responsibly deal with their own life should not be involved in the political process.So people who wholeheartedly adopt the teachings and morals of a 2000 year old story book as fact should definatly be banned from voting!

[Damn True]

You know, it goes both ways. Locally the college republicans at my university were having people sign fake petions. The petions actually were a contract that pledged your alligence to the republican national party and affiliated you with them. Some took it so far as to use the information to register these people to vote as republicans without their conscent. The people collecting signatures on the fake petions were telling people it was to get measures on the ballot that would enforce stricter punishments for pediphiles and repeat sex offenders. Talk about dirty tactics. Politics get ugly. I would hardly chastise a party for targeting a demographic, both sides do it. What I find disgusting is when you lie to someone and tell them they are helping put child molesters behind bars and they are secretly registering you to vote as a part of a party, without your concent.


Agreed, dirty pool to say the least.

[Damn True]

So people who wholeheartedly adopt the teachings and morals of a 2000 year old story book as fact should definatly be banned from voting!

Way over the line.

[Changleen]

Way over the line.What line?

[Damn True]

By your satement we are left to infer that you think people of faith are less able to deal with life on their own than those who are without faith.

So I suppose Jewish people fall into that group for following the Torah?
.....Muslims for following the Koran?
....Buddists too?
...Native Americans....heck they don't even have a book.
...Better throw the Maori in for their belief in Po, Te Ata, Rangi, and Papa.

Wow, it must be lonely being one of the only smart guys in a world of dolts.

[Changleen]

By your satement we are left to infer that you think people of faith are less able to deal with life on their own than those who are without faith.That's pretty much right. You've chosen to to adopt a arbitrary set of 'rules' about how you live your life based on a book which is supposedly the word of God. In doing so you, in a very real way, are divulging personal responsibility for your decisions and actions and replacing them with 'Jeezus said I should think this so I do.'

So I suppose Jewish people fall into that group for following the Torah?
.....Muslims for following the Koran?
....Buddists too?
...Native Americans....heck they don't even have a book.
...Better throw the Maori in for their belief in Po, Te Ata, Rangi, and Papa.

Wow, it must be lonely being one of the only smart guys in a world of dolts.Yup. Fortunatly for me, in the more developed parts of the world, (i.e. most of the rest of the first world except the US) religious practice is falling. Actually it's pretty depressing that a huge section of the worlds population cannot see past the obvious flaws and ridiculousness of organised religion.

[Skookum]

...Native Americans....heck they don't even have a book.

Oral history and tradition have been found to be a more accurate method recording facts than written text. It's common sense really. Just look at how difficult it is to communicate on the internet. I mean old text didn't even have the benefit of smilies. Tough stuff to do i don't envy the many that try to find.... whatever within text.
We all come from one people, our creator is the same, our perceptions are varied, takes volition to be balanced in all aspects of life.
i had a great talk with my Christian buddy a couple weeks back on issues of spirituality. He's almost a man without a church lately. He's a funny cat too, he even read the Mormon Bible so he could converse about it with his neighbor. haha.
He used to get pissed off too when i'd come up to him and say i want to attend his church giving him a desperate look. i would tell him i want to pray there. Then i'd smile and say pray on 16 year old virgins!!!! Haha
He's lightened up a tad since them days, and so have i. It's real easy to find differences, the beauty usually comes from the similarities.

Welp anyways where were we. Hmmm crack, yup nasty stuff, i would prefer coffee way over that stuff....

[BurlyShirley]

Damn True = Winner of this debate.

[BurlyShirley]

Oral history and tradition have been found to be a more accurate method recording facts than written text.
No they havent, dude. Not even close...

[Silver]

Ya know, if you don't understand what I am saying, and either you often dont or you choose to decide what I mean regardless of what I say feel free to ask.
My disgust is with the people who TAKE ADVANTAGE of the system and the system that allows it. I said, no less than three times (which is why I am led to believe you either don't read, understand, or choose to ignore what I am actually saying) that there ARE people who genuinely need public assistance, and I have no problem with them getting it. My problem is with those who can and choose not to take care of themselves.

Poverty is not an incurable disease. If you honestly believe that there aren't people who are in that situation as a result of their own inaction you are either seriously deluded or morbidly overcome with guilt for your own precieved excesses.

Greenpeace - hybrid - oil.......whatever. I don't know anyone tall enough to reach that far.

If you find giving up in excess of 35% of your annual income to taxes acceptible then more power to ya. I hope you got kissed first because you are certainly getting ____ked.
I find those figures, espeicially in light of the way my govt squanders the money on senseless entitlements abhorant and pretty dang close to an a$$rape in terms of fairness.


Congrats. You've nicely bought into the Puritan view that people deserve to be in whatever situation they happen to be in.

Personally, I think spending money on technology to kill vast amounts of people is a waste...but I assume you don't agree with that...

Here is the difference: I'm willing to admit that there are some people who take advantage of the system, and I can live with that. You admit there are some people who are helped, but you're willing to screw them over because of the bad apples...right?

Just out of curiosity, what was line 60 in your 1040 last year? I just want to see if you have more to bitch about than I do. For all I know, I helped pay for your unemployed ass...

[Changleen]

Damn True = Winner of this debate.Bwahhahahaha :nuts:

You're Funny.

[Skookum]

No they havent, dude. Not even close...
i'm sorry you're probably right.... hey i have an idea that'll make us a ton of dough but might very much prove me right. Let's try to write a version of the bible in instant messaging shorthand. Man could take us years, but what a challenge.....

[BurlyShirley]

i'm sorry you're probably right.... hey i have an idea that'll make us a ton of dough but might very much prove me right. Let's try to write a version of the bible in instant messaging shorthand. Man could take us years, but what a challenge.....
I suck at that stuff, but if we could make david have pwn3d goliath, I guess Im down.

[Skookum]

Yah this is the hard stuff here though....

"Better to be lowly in spirit and among the oppressed than to share plunder with the proud." Proverbs 16:19)

B2B kickin in da hood JC wit poor ppl 0:-) than rippin off w/bosses. Prvbs 16:19

meh on second thought......

[fluff]

Where is the hypocrisy?

Im saying that we SHOULD help those that need it.

So shall I surmise that you would have the system remain the way it is? Or worse grow?
Easy to say when it isn't YOUR money.

I said lack of hypocrisy and I was talking about atheism. Chill...